LETTER: Concerns with county plan

On Tuesday, Jan. 19, after two years of collecting input from advisory bodies and planning staff, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors held what it indicated will be its only public hearing on what could possibly become the two most important Comprehensive Plan documents it considers during the current board's tenure: The Long Range Land Use and the Transportation chapters.

As the At-Large representative and current Chairman of the county's Planning Commission, I have been closely involved in this process from the beginning. Following the board hearing on the 19th, I received several comments from planning commissioners and numerous comments from citizens concerned about the direction the board seems to be headed with these two chapters. I would like to share some of these concerns.

From all indications, the board seems to be headed for adoption of the planning staff text recommendations on these two chapters at its Feb. 2 meeting, with perhaps some minor "wordsmithing" modifications. Citizens should know that the Planning Commission carefully considered the texts for both these chapters and found the staff recommendations problematic, particularly in the land use chapter. None of these concerns have been addressed. Space constraints here prevent a full discussion, so I will mention just a few of the major concerns with the land use chapter. The planning staff text:

1. Provides no incentives for focused, major development in the two areas of the county identified by the Planning Commission as most in need of redevelopment and revitalization, which already have the basic public infrastructure in place and are the most likely locations for future metro rail expansion from Fairfax into Prince William County: North Woodbridge and Yorkshire.

2. The "centers", as proposed by staff, have been best described by a fellow planning commissioner as allowing "anything, anywhere, anytime." There is no limit on the number of these centers that could be advanced and the Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) located a large portion of them in the Brentsville District. Planning staff proposes these "centers" comp plan amendment initiations be allowed without form, format, or defined content, other than a vague "mixed use" requirement, and without any major investment in the county or the process by the applicant, whenever a proposal is submitted. It would then be left to staff to work out the details along the way, thus allowing unprecedented "flexibility." In this scenario, I am sure staff would do the best job possible to "work out the details." But any such effort will, of necessity, be constrained by resources and staff availability. Due to budget restraints and numerous department vacancies, planning staff is already stretched to its limits. Does it make any sense to add what would surely become dramatic new burdens on an already overburdened department? And if so, what would be the likely result?

3. Provides no phasing structure on mixed use projects. We've been down this road before. How many times have mixed use projects been approved in the past, the residential component installed, then the commercial component left waiting for "the market to catch up"? This scenario always results in more rooftops, more congested roads, more overcrowded schools and less revenue for the county to meet it obligations because the commercial component either never happens or happens to such a minimal level as to fail to offset the budget burdens the new homes create.

4. Fails to include the Planning Commission safeguards designed to protect the rural areas from encroachment. Anyone who cares about advancing smarter growth principles knows encouraging and concentrating growth in the development area, and protecting rural areas from sprawl development, are key features. While the planning staff text mentions smart growth principles, and makes plentiful use of smart growth language, the proposed details tell a very different story.

Citizens who care about what the future of Prince William County will look like should let their supervisors know of their concerns before the board's Feb. 2 meeting, when it plans to act on these chapters.

GARY C. FRIEDMAN

Chairman of the Prince William County Planning Commission